Table of contents for Thirteen strategies to measure college teaching : a consumer's guide to rating scale construction, assessment, and decision making for faculty, administrators, and clinicians / Ronald A. Berk.

Bibliographic record and links to related information available from the Library of Congress catalog.

Note: Contents data are machine generated based on pre-publication provided by the publisher. Contents may have variations from the printed book or be incomplete or contain other coding.

CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER
1. TOP 13 SOURCES OF EVIDENCE OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS
A Few Ground Rules
Teaching Effectiveness: Defining the Construct
National Standards
Beyond Student Ratings
A Unified Conceptualization
13 Sources of Evidence
Student Ratings
Peer Ratings
Self-Evaluation
External Expert Ratings
Videos
Student Interviews
Exit and Alumni Ratings
Employer Ratings
Administrator Ratings
Teaching Scholarship
Teaching Awards
Learning Outcome Measures
Teaching Portfolio
BONUS: 360° Multi-Source Assessment
Berk's Top Picks
Formative Decisions
Summative Decisions
Program Decisions
Decision Time
2. CREATING THE RATING SCALE STRUCTURE
Overview of Scale Construction Process
Specifying the "Purpose" of the Scale
Delimiting "What" Is to Be Measured
Focus Groups
Interviews
Research Evidence
Determining "How" to Measure the "What"
Existing Scales
Item Banks
Commercially Published Scales
Universe of Items
Structure of Rating Scale Items
Structured Items
Unstructured Items
3. GENERATING THE STATEMENTS
Preliminary Decisions
Domain Specifications
Number of Statements
Rules for Writing Statements
1. The statement should be clear and direct.
2. The statement should be brief and concise.
3. The statement should contain only one complete behavior, thought, concept.
4. The statement should be a simple sentence.
5. The statement should be at the appropriate reading level.
6. The statement should be grammatically correct.
7. The statement should be worded strongly.
8. The statement should be congruent with the behavior it is intended to measure.
9. The statement should accurately measure a positive or negative behavior.
10. The statement should be applicable to all respondents.
11. The respondents should be in the best position to respond to the statement.
12. The statement should be interpretable in only one way.
13. The statement should NOT contain a double negative.
14. The statement should NOT contain universal or absolute terms.
15. The statement should NOT contain nonabsolute, warm and fuzzy terms.
16. The statement should NOT contain value-laden or inflammatory words.
17. The statement should NOT contain words, phrases, or abbreviations that would be unfamiliar to all respondents.
18. The statement should NOT tap a behavior appearing in any other statement.
19. The statement should NOT be factual or capable of being interpreted as factual.
20. The statement should NOT be endorsed or given one answer by almost all respondents or by almost none.
4. SELECTING THE ANCHORS
Types of Anchors
Intensity Anchors
Evaluation Anchors
Frequency Anchors
Quantity Anchors
Comparison Anchors
Rules for Selecting Anchors
1. The anchors should be consistent with the purpose of the rating scale.
2. The anchors should match the statements, phrases, or word topics.
3. The anchors should be logically appropriate with each statement.
4. The anchors should be grammatically consistent with each statement.
5. The anchors should provide the most accurate and concrete responses possible.
6. The anchors should elicit a range of responses.
7. The anchors on bipolar scales should be balanced, not biased.
8. The anchors on unipolar scales should be graduated appropriately.
5. REFINING THE ITEM STRUCTURE
Preparing for Structural Changes
Issues in Scale Construction
1. What rating scale format is best?
2. How many anchor points should be on the scale?
3. Should there be a designated midpoint position, such as "neutral," "uncertain," or "undecided," on the scale?
4. How many anchors should be specified on the scale?
5. Should numbers be placed on the anchor scale?
6. Should a NOT APPLICABLE (NA) or NOT OBSERVED (NO) option be
provided?
7. How can response set biases be minimized?
6. ASSEMBLING THE SCALE FOR ADMINISTRATION
Assembling the Scale
Identification Information
Purpose
Directions
Structured Items
Unstructured Items
Scale Administration
Paper-Based Administration
Online Administration
Comparability of Paper-Based and Online Ratings
Conclusions
7. FIELD TESTING AND ITEM ANALYSES
Preparing the Draft Scale for a Test Spin
Field Test Procedures
Mini-Field Test
Monster-Field Test
Item Analyses
Stage 1: Item Descriptive Statistics
Stage 2: Interitem and Item-Scale Correlations
Stage 3: Factor Analysis
8. COLLECTING EVIDENCE OF VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY
Validity Evidence
Evidence Based on Job Content Domain
Evidence Based on Response Processes
Evidence Based on Internal Scale Structure
Evidence Related to Other Measures of Teaching Effectiveness
Evidence Based on the Consequences of Ratings
Reliability Evidence
Classical Reliability Theory
Summated Rating Scale Theory
Methods of Estimating Reliability
Epilogue
9. REPORTING AND INTERPRETING SCALE RESULTS
Generic Levels of Score Reporting
Item Anchor
Item
Subscale
Total Scale
Department/Program Norms
Subject Matter/Program Level State, Regional, and National Norms
Criterion-Referenced vs. Norm-Referenced Interpretations
Score Range
Criterion-Referenced Interpretations
Norm-Referenced Interpretations
Formative, Summative, and Program Decisions
Formative Decisions
Summative Decisions
Program Decisions
Conclusions
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
A. Sample Rating Scales
B. Sample 360° Assessment Rating Scales
C. Sample Reporting Formats
D. Commercially Published Student Rating Scale Systems